“Justices, 5-4, Accept No Excuses From Inmate for Mistaken Late Filing of an Appeal”: Linda Greenhouse will have this article Friday in The New York Times.

“High Court Upholds Curb on Political Use of Union Fees”: Charles Lane will have this article Friday in The Washington Post.

Available online from law.com: Shannon P. Duffy has an article headlined “There’s No Sugarcoating the Splenda Settlement Spat.”

And in other news, “McDermott Chairman to Offer Firm’s Apologies for Partner’s Remark to Judge.”

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Ashcroft Can Remain in Detainee’s Suit“; “ACLU Presses Case to Unseal Bush Papers“: and “Slaughterhouse Can Stay Open Longer.”

“These interlocutory appeals present several issues concerning the defense of qualified immunity in the aftermath of the events of 9/11.” So begins the lengthy ruling that a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued today in Iqbal v. Hasty.

Back in October 2006, The New York Times covered the Second Circuit’s oral argument in an article headlined “Judges Zero In on Treatment of a Detainee.” That article begins, “In sharp questioning, a three-judge panel yesterday challenged arguments by federal officials seeking dismissal of a Pakistani man’s suit charging that because of his religion, race or national origin, he, like others, was held for months after 9/11 in abusive solitary confinement before being cleared of links to terrorism and deported. In the mahogany and marble splendor of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Lower Manhattan, lawyers for former Attorney General John Ashcroft and other government officials argued that the officials were entitled to immunity from the lawsuit filed by the man, Javaid Iqbal, who had been known as ‘the cable guy’ to his Long Island customers before he was swept into a federal detention center in Brooklyn as were hundreds of other Muslim immigrants in the New York area.” I collected additional news coverage of that oral argument in this earlier post.

The federal district court’s ruling can be accessed here. In coverage of that ruling, The Associated Press provided a report headlined “Detainee Abuse Suit Can Continue; Judge: Men Held After 9/11 Can Challenge U.S. Officials In Lawsuit.” As reported in this later New York Times article, the United States government has already paid $300,000 to settle the claims of Iqbal’s co-plaintiff.

Additional coverage from The New York Times appeared in articles headlined “2 Men Charge Abuse in Arrests After 9/11 Terror Attack“; “Held in 9/11 Net, Muslims Return To Accuse U.S.“: and “Top Officials Told to Testify In Muslims’ Suit” (TimesSelect subscription required).

“Ga. High Court to Hear Teen Sex Case”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Georgia’s Supreme Court agreed Thursday to hear the state’s arguments for keeping in prison a man who had consensual sex with a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. The attorney general later said his release could open the floodgates for hundreds of incarcerated child molesters looking for a way out.”

And The Atlanta Journal-Constitution provides a news update headlined “Wilson attorney blasts Douglas DA office; Prosecutors tape mother of victim after she speaks with media.”

Upon further reflection, perhaps U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton won’t be calling on these twelve law professors for additional amicus input in other less high-profile cases: According to this post at “The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times,” today Judge Walton said of the law professors and their amicus brief, “They are very bright people but the submission was not something I would expect from a first year law student.” Previously, in a snide footnote to his order granting permission to file the amicus brief, Judge Walton wrote that he looked forward to calling on “these luminaries” for additional amicus assistance in the future. Apparently he has reconsidered the usefulness of doing so.

“Low-Profile Supreme Court Case Offers Glimpse of Sharp Divide”: law.com’s Tony Mauro provides this news update.

“Pete Williams just quoted ‘How Appealing’ by name on MSNBC, discussing the pants lawsuit!” So emails a reader. My post today about that lawsuit is titled “Do these pants make me look stupid?”

Update: “skippy the bush kangaroo” provides some additional details.

“MLB Takes Fantasy League to Court”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “Attorneys representing Major League Baseball argued Thursday that online fantasy baseball companies cannot operate without paying license fees to MLB to compensate players for the use of their names. A federal appeals panel of three judges seemed skeptical that MLB could take financial control of a game that uses publicly available statistics and widely known names of players.”

The appeal was argued today before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit consisting of Chief Judge James B. Loken, Circuit Judge Steven M. Colloton, and Senior Circuit Judge Morris S. Arnold. You can access the oral argument audio via this link (12MB mp3 file).

“The question presented in this People’s appeal is whether the Fourth Amendment requires police officers to corroborate an anonymous tip before contacting the occupant of a residence and seeking consent to enter and search.” So begins a decision that the Supreme Court of California issued today. The very next sentence of that court’s unanimous opinion states, “We conclude it does not and reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal.”

In news updates available online from The Washington Post: An update reports that “Judge Won’t Delay Libby’s Prison Term for Appeal.”

And an update headlined “DOJ Investigates if Gonzales Tried to Influence Aide’s Testimony” begins, “The Justice Department is investigating whether Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales sought to influence the testimony of a departing senior aide during a March meeting in Gonzales’s office, according to correspondence released today.”

“Supreme Court rules against public employee unions”: David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times provides this news update.

“High court limits union use of nonmember fees”: Reuters provides this report, along with an article headlined “US top court allows lawsuits on UN property taxes.”

And Greg Stohr of Bloomberg News reports that “Nations Must Face Property-Tax Suits, U.S. Court Says.”

“Bush Detainee Plans Under Fire”: The Associated Press provides a news analysis that begins, “President Bush’s global war on terror is drawing heavy fire on the home front, both from Congress and the courts.”

“Legislators vote to defeat same-sex marriage ban”: The Boston Globe provides a news update that begins, “A proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage was defeated today by a joint session of the Legislature by a vote of 45 to 151, eliminating any chance of getting it on the ballot in November 2008. At least 50 votes were needed to advance the measure.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Mass. keeps gay marriage ban from voters.”

“Judge Won’t Delay Libby Prison Term”: The Associated Press provides this report. According to the article, “Libby’s newly formed appellate team – Lawrence S. Robbins and Mark Stancil – will seek an emergency order delaying the sentence.”

“CIA Leak Trial Judge Received Threats”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “The federal judge who oversaw I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby’s CIA leak trial said Thursday that he received threatening letters and phone calls after sentencing the former White House aide to prison.”

Trashing the Fourth Amendment: Does a person have an expectation of privacy in his garbage that society recognizes as reasonable? By a vote of 3-2, the Supreme Court of South Dakota yesterday answered that question “no” in a decision that you can access here.

The majority opinion begins, “Law enforcement officers in Rapid City conducted a trash pull of defendant’s garbage over five months after obtaining information that led them to believe he was committing a crime. After finding evidence of a controlled substance in the trash, the officers obtained a warrant to search defendant’s home. The search revealed more evidence, and defendant was indicted. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence claiming that he had a protected privacy interest in his trash and the officers did not have reasonable suspicion to search it. The circuit court suppressed the evidence. The State appeals, and we reverse.”

“Southwick vote delayed again”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi provides a news update that begins, “An anticipated vote today on the nomination of Mississippi judge Leslie Southwick for a seat on 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was delayed for the third time because of controversy over his record.”

“Teacher Who Talked Peace Appeals Firing”: The Associated Press provides a report that begins, “An elementary school teacher who says she was fired for talking to her students about peace activism has appealed her dismissal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Deb Mayer’s attorney said he wants the high court to resolve lower-court disagreements about how much free-speech protection teachers have when they speak in class.”

My earlier coverage of this Seventh Circuit ruling appeared at this link.

“Warner, Webb pick five for posts”: The Richmond Times-Dispatch today contains an article that begins, “In a show of bipartisanship, Virginia’s senators have recommended five candidates for two vacancies on the Richmond-based federal appeals court.”

The Daily Progress of Charlottesville, Virginia reports today that “Webb, Warner back Albro for judge.” The name of this particular potential Fourth Circuit nominee is Thomas E. Albro, who should not be confused with sitting Third Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro.

The Roanoke Times reports that “2 judges in valley up for appeals court posts; Virginia’s senators have chosen five candidates for two spots on a federal appeals court.”

And The Associated Press reports that “Warner, Webb announce recommendations for 4th Circuit.”

Additional biographical information about the potential nominees can be accessed via this post at “Confirm Them.”

“Girl’s mother defends Wilson; Penalty too severe, and sex was consensual, she says; prosecutors suspect that defendants’ supporters have been pressuring her”: Today’s edition of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution contains an article that begins, “Genarlow Wilson should never have been criminally charged and imprisoned for receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old girl at a New Year’s Eve party more than three years ago, the girl’s mother says.”

“Senate panel to debate Southwick appointment today; Civil and human rights groups oppose confirmation”: The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi contains this article today, along with an editorial entitled “Southwick: Consider the person, not politics.”

And FOXNews reports that “New Fight Heats Up in Senate Over Bush Judicial Nominee.”

“Fractured 10th Court of Appeals a hotbed for dissent, animosity”: This interesting article appeared Sunday in The Waco Tribune-Herald. The article reports on the 10th Court of Appeals of Texas, and not on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

“Court rules foreign governments not immune to some taxes”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.”

Justice Clarence Thomas issued today’s ruling for a 7-2 majority in Permanent Mission of India to United Nations v. City of New York, No. 06-134. You can access the opinion here and the oral argument transcript here.

Justice Thomas also issued the ruling on behalf of a 5-4 majority in Bowles v. Russell, No. 06-5306, a case involving federal appellate court jurisdiction and the timeliness of a notice of appeal. You can access the opinion here and the oral argument transcript here.

Today’s final ruling issued in Davenport v. Washington Ed. Assn., No. 05-1589. Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, in which the result was unanimous, although there were three partially concurring votes. You can access the opinion here and the oral argument transcript here.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Unions Lose on Political Fee Issue“; “Justices Side With NYC Over Embassies“; and “Convicted Murder’s Appeal Dismissed.”

“Former Bush aides subpoenaed; A showdown between the White House and Congress is seen as the pair are called to testify on U.S. attorney firings”: This article appears today in The Los Angeles Times.

And USA Today reports today that “Congress subpoenas 2 former Bush administration figures.”

Do these pants make me look stupid? Reuters reports that “Man suing over trousers aims to fund more cases.”

Today in The Washington Post, Metro columnist Marc Fisher has an essay entitled “Wearing Down the Judicial System With a Pair of Pants.”

And The New York Times reports today that “Dry Cleaner Calls $54 Million Lawsuit Over Pants a ‘Nightmare.’”

“Judge to Rule on Libby’s Request to Remain Free”: The Washington Post provides this news update.

And The Associated Press reports that “Libby in Court to Try to Stall Sentence.”

“Alito Calls Free-Speech Limits ‘Dangerous’ as Court Considers Cases”: Robert Barnes has this article today in The Washington Post.

“Court limits towns’ power to seize land; ‘Underused’ designation deficient in S. Jersey eminent domain case”: The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger contains this article today, along with an article headlined “Ruling gives hope to property owners; Cases also pending in Newark, Long Branch.”

The New York Times reports today that “Town Went Too Far in Trying to Take Land, Court Says.”

And The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that “N.J. court tightens land-seizure rules; It backs a landowner in a long fight with Paulsboro.”

My earlier coverage of yesterday’s ruling of the Supreme Court of New Jersey appeared at this link.

“Nomination of Chief Justice Raises Questions in Trenton”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

And The Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger reports today that “Gill keeps block on Rabner for court; Won’t list objections to justice nominee.”

“Bork v. Bork”: The New York Times today contains an editorial that begins, “There are many versions of the cliche that ‘a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged,’ and Robert Bork has just given rise to another. A tort plaintiff, it turns out, is a critic of tort lawsuits who has slipped and fallen at the Yale Club.”

“F***, S*** and Other Typos: On keeping polite society separate from Paulie Walnuts society.” Daniel Henninger has this op-ed (free access) today in The Wall Street Journal.